LEGAL REASONING
1. LEGAL PRINCIPLE: The acceptance must be absolute and unqualified, leaving no ground for doubt or uncertainty. If the acceptance is conditional, no valid contract is formed, and the offer can be withdrawn at any moment till the absolute acceptance has taken place within reasonable time of such offer.
FACTUAL SITUATION: TheDelhi Government conducted an auction for the sale of license of wine shop. X offered the highest bid which was provisionally accepted “….subject to the confirmation of Chief Commissioner who may reject any bid without assigning any reasons.” Since X failed to deposit the required amount, Chief Commissioner rejected the bid. The Government held X liable for the difference between the bid offered by him and the highest bid accepted in re-auction, and commenced proceedings for the recovery of the sum. It was contended on behalf of the Government of Delhi that X was under a legal obligation to pay the difference as it was due to his default that a resale of the excise shop was ordered and hence X was liable for the deficiency in price and all expenses of such resale which was caused by his default.
Decide, giving reasons, whether X is liable to make payment to the Delhi Government?
(a) No, X is not liable to make payment as the shop was sold to the highest bidder
(b) X is liable to pay because the Government of Delhi had to conduct re-auction and also suffered loss in the sale of the shop
(c) X is liable because his bid was accepted but he failed to deposit the required amount on time
(d) No, contract for sale was not complete till the bid was confirmed by the Chief Commissioner and till such confirmation, the bidder was entitled to withdraw the bid.
2. LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Employers/ Principles are vicariously liable, under the respondeat superior doctrine, for negligent acts or omissions by their employees/agents in the course of employment/ agency. A servant/agent may be defined as any person employed by another to do work for him on the terms that he, the servant/agent, is to be subject to the control and directions of his employer/principal in respect of the manner in which his work is to be done.
FACTUAL SITUATION: A motor car was owned by and registered and insured in the name of A (wife) but was regarded by her and her husband (B) as “our car”. B used it to go to work, and A for shopping at the weekends. B told A that if ever he was drunk and unfit to drive through, he would get a sober friend to drive him or else telephone her to come and fetch him. On the day in question the husband telephoned the wife after work and told her that he was going out with friends. He visited a number of public houses and had drinks. At some stage, he realised that he was unable to drive safely and asked a friend, C, to drive. C drove them to other public houses. After the last had been visited C offered the three friends (X, Y and Z) a lift and they got in, together with B who was in a soporific condition. C then proceeded, at his own suggestion, to drive in a direction away from the B’s home to have a meal. On the way, due to C’s negligent driving, an accident occurred in which both B and C were killed and the other friends got injured. X, Y and Z brought an action against the wife both in her personal capacity and as administratrix of the husband’s estate. Decide whether A is liable?
a) Yes, she was vicariously liable for the negligent driving of C as the principle of vicarious liability was to put responsibility on to the person, namely, in the case of a motor car, the owner, who ought in justice to bear it, and that in the case of a “family car” the owner was responsible for the use of it by the other spouse.
b) No, C had not been the wife’s agent in driving the husband about as he had been doing at the time of the accident. To fix vicarious liability on the owner of a motor car in a case such as the present, it must be shown that the driver was using it for the owner’s purposes under delegation of a task or duty.
c) No, because this is a case of volenti non fit injuria as X, Y and Z voluntarily took the lift knowing that C was also drunk.
d) No, because C was not employed by A to drive her husband back to the home on the day of accident.
The answers are: 1. (d); 2. (b).
LOGICAL REASONING
1. Some students were standing in a row facing North. Only Deepa was between Sonam and Nada. Bhupendra was exactly midway in the row. The number of students to the left of Bhupendra was equal to the cube of Kalika’s rank from the left end and the number of students of the right of Bhupendra was equal to the square of Ashish’s rank from the left end of the row. The number of students was less than 1000. How many students were there between Kalika and Bhupendra?
(a) 61
(b) 60
(c) Data Inadequate
(d) None of these
2. Loyalty : Disloyalty ::
(a) Accord : Consent
(b) Diligence : Laziness
(c) Code : Encode
(d) Pain : Jealousy
3. 112, 111, 119, 92, 156, 31, ?
(a) 387
(b) 247
(c) 375
(d) 287
4. Find out the wrong term in the given number series.
11, 42, 214, 1045, 4148, 12417
(a) 1045
(b) 214
(c) 4148
(d) None of these
5. AYBZC, DWEXĘ, GUHVI, JSKTL, ?
(a) QMONR
(b) MQORN
(c) NQMOR
(d) MQNRO
The answers are: 1. (b); 2. (b); 3. (b); 4. (b); 5. (d).
ANALYTICAL REASONING
If there is an oil-supply disruption resulting in higher international oil prices, domestic oil prices in open-market countries such as the United States will rise as well, whether such countries import all or none of their oil.
If the statement in the passage concerning oil-supply disruptions is true, which of the following policies in an open-market nation is most likely to reduce the long-term economic impact on that nation of sharp and unexpected increases in international oil prices?
(a) Maintaining the quantity of oil imported at constant yearly levels.
(b) Increasing the number of oil tankers in its fleet.
(c) Suspending diplomatic relations with major oil-producing nations.
(d) Decreasing oil consumption through conservation.
The answer is (d).
